Search Results

Wound cover dressing for the following wounds: Acute Wounds such as: Surgical wounds, Lacerations, Donor site wounds, First and second degree burns, Skin tears, Abrasions. Chronic Wounds such as: Pressure sores, Diabetic ulcers, Venous stasis ulcers, Arterial stasis ulcers.

AcryDerm Silver Antimicrobial Barrier Wound Dressing is a moist sheet wound dressing that contains silver halide that may help to reduce growth of microbial contaminants of the dressing. The base matrix is composed of a hydrophilic polyacrylate absorbent sheet containing silver halide and stabilizers. AcryDerm Silver Antimicrobial Barrier Wound Dressing will be supplied as sterile sheets of 2x2"; 4x4"; 4x8"; of 8x8" sizes, packaged in single use heat sealed medical grade foil pouches.

The provided text describes a 510(k) summary for the AcryDerm Silver Antimicrobial Barrier Wound Dressing, focusing on its substantial equivalence to predicate devices and its intended use. However, it does not contain any information about acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets those criteria, as typically performed for AI/ML devices.

The document is a regulatory submission for a medical device (wound dressing) that was prepared in 1999/2000. It is primarily concerned with demonstrating that the new device is "substantially equivalent" to existing legally marketed devices, rather than establishing performance against specific acceptance criteria through clinical trials.

Therefore, I cannot populate the table or answer most of your specific questions related to acceptance criteria, AI performance studies, sample sizes, expert ground truth, or MRMC studies, because this information is not present in the provided text.

Here's a breakdown of what can be extracted and why other questions cannot be answered:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g., country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)

• Not Applicable. The document describes a physical wound dressing and its composition, an AI/ML device would require a "test set" of data (e.g., images, patient records). This device does not generate or analyze data in that manner. No test set for performance evaluation is mentioned.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g., radiologist with 10 years of experience)

• Not Applicable. This is not an AI/ML device. Ground truth, in the context of an AI/ML device, would refer to expert-labeled data used to evaluate algorithm performance. The device is a wound dressing.

4. Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set

• Not Applicable. See point 3.

5. If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance

• Not Applicable. See point 3.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done

• Not Applicable. See point 3.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert concensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)

• Not Applicable. See point 3. The relevant "ground truth" for a wound dressing would typically involve clinical healing outcomes, but no such study is detailed in this 510(k) summary for performance evaluation.

8. The sample size for the training set

• Not Applicable. This is not an AI/ML device that requires a training set.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established

• Not Applicable. See point 8.

In summary: The provided document is a 510(k) premarket notification for a physical medical device (wound dressing) aiming for substantial equivalence to existing products. It does not involve AI/ML technology, and therefore, the concepts of acceptance criteria for AI performance, test sets, training sets, ground truth establishment by experts, or MRMC studies are not applicable to the information contained within these pages.

Ask a specific question about this device